Before its takeover of Hong Kong, Beijing promised the people of Hong Kong and the international community the following things.
First, China would abide by the "one country, two systems" model, under which Hong Kong would be allowed to maintain political, economic and social systems different from China's for at least 50 years. Second, Hong Kong would be ruled by Hong Kong people, meaning that, according to the Basic Law, the chief executive and Legislative Council members would be locally elected, and would not be officials appointed by China.
The reason that the late Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (
Since its return to China in July 1997, the situation in Hong Kong has deteriorated from the time when it was a British colony. Although people still dance and gamble on horses in Hong Kong, business has been hollowed out, the economy is sinking, unemployment is soaring, real estate prices are falling sharply and personal assets are shrinking. People are unhappy with Beijing-appointed Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa's (董建華) performance. However, despite Tung's approval rating of not much more than 10 percent, he is still firmly backed by Beijing.
As the Chinese government has kept none of its promises, 500,000 Hong Kong people took to the streets on July 1 last year. They protested the Tung administration's plan to force the passage of legislation based on Article 23 of the Basic Law, aimed at restricting people's freedom. Under such pressure, Beijing could not but order the local government to withdraw the bill.
On Jan. 1, hundreds of thousands of people once again marched through downtown Hong Kong to ask for democracy. They demanded that the chief executive be directly elected. They did not want a candidate appointed by Beijing and elected via indirect elections. They also requested that all seats in the Legislative Council be filled through direct popular elections.
Beijing ignored these appeals.
Beijing's new restrictions on Hong Kong's self-rule policy means that many Democratic Party members, such as legislators Martin Lee (李柱銘) and Emily Lau (劉慧卿), will not qualify for the next legislative election.
Why is China so afraid of Hong Kong's democracy? Some believe that China's leaders are worried that the democratization of Hong Kong and Taiwan will advance political reform in China, encouraging the Chinese to demand direct elections for mayors, provincial governors, representatives to the congress and even president.
The Beijing authorities have an indescribable fear of real democracy. They believe in one-party dictatorship with political power in the hands of a few. The "centralized democracy" they have advocated is nothing but a gimmick that facilitates the attempt of the few to exercise control over the majority.
Unfortunately, Hong Kong democracy advocates, such as Lee and Lau, still support the "one country, two systems" model and oppose Taiwan's independence.
Hopefully, they will come to understand that the existence of a democratic Taiwan is beneficial to Hong Kong because it places some restrictions on Chinese actions in Hong Kong.
Absurdly, some people in Taiwan also support the "one country, two systems" model. But just look at what has happened in Hong Kong over the past few years. Beijing's promises are completely worthless. In view of the Hong Kong example, I call on Taiwanese people to open their eyes.
Parris Chang is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Jennie Shih
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS